Background: While hearing aids for a contralateral routing of signals (CROS-HA) and bone conduction devices have been the traditional treatment for single-sided deafness (SSD) and asymmetric hearing loss (AHL), in recent years, cochlear implants (CIs) have increasingly become a viable treatment choice, particularly in countries where regulatory approval and reimbursement schemes are in place. Part of the reason for this shift is that the CI is the only device capable of restoring bilateral input to the auditory system and hence of possibly reinstating binaural hearing. Although several studies have independently shown that the CI is a safe and effective treatment for SSD and AHL, clinical outcome measures in those studies and across CI centers vary greatly. Only with a consistent use of defined and agreed-upon outcome measures across centers can high-level evidence be generated to assess the safety and efficacy of CIs and alternative treatments in recipients with SSD and AHL. Methods: This paper presents a comparative study design and minimum outcome measures for the assessment of current treatment options in patients with SSD/AHL. The protocol was developed, discussed, and eventually agreed upon by expert panels that convened at the 2015 APSCI conference in Beijing, China, and at the CI 2016 conference in Toronto, Canada. Results: A longitudinal study design comparing CROS-HA, BCD, and CI treatments is proposed. The recommended outcome measures include (1) speech in noise testing, using the same set of 3 spatial configurations to compare binaural benefits such as summation, squelch, and head shadow across devices; (2) localization testing, using stimuli that rove in both level and spectral content; (3) questionnaires to collect quality of life measures and the frequency of device use; and (4) questionnaires for assessing the impact of tinnitus before and after treatment, if applicable. Conclusion: A protocol for the assessment of treatment options and outcomes in recipients with SSD and AHL is presented. The proposed set of minimum outcome measures aims at harmonizing assessment methods across centers and thus at generating a growing body of high-level evidence for those treatment options.

The programming of CIs is essential for good performance. However, no Good Clinical Practice guidelines exist. This paper reports on the results of an inventory of the current practice worldwide. A questionnaire was distributed to 47 CI centers. They follow 47600 recipients in 17 countries and 5 continents. The results were discussed during a debate. Sixty-two percent of the results were verified through individual interviews during the following months. Most centers (72%) participated in a cross-sectional study logging 5 consecutive fitting sessions in 5 different recipients. Data indicate that general practice starts with a single switch-on session, followed by three monthly sessions, three quarterly sessions, and then annual sessions, all containing one hour of programming and testing. The main focus lies on setting maximum and, to a lesser extent, minimum current levels per electrode. These levels are often determined on a few electrodes and then extrapolated. They are mainly based on subjective loudness perception by the CI user and, to a lesser extent, on pure tone and speech audiometry. Objective measures play a small role as indication of the global MAP profile. Other MAP parameters are rarely modified. Measurable targets are only defined for pure tone audiometry. Huge variation exists between centers on all aspects of the fitting practice.

This study aimed to determine the impact of cochlear implantation on speech understanding in noise, subjective perception of hearing, and tinnitus perception of adult patients with unilateral severe to profound hearing loss and to investigate whether duration of deafness and age at implantation would influence the outcomes. In addition, this article describes the auditory training protocol used for unilaterally deaf patients. This is a prospective study of subjects undergoing cochlear implantation for unilateral deafness with or without associated tinnitus. Speech perception in noise was tested using the Bamford-Kowal-Bench speech-in-noise test presented at 65 dB SPL. The Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale and the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit were used to evaluate the subjective perception of hearing with a cochlear implant and quality of life. Tinnitus disturbance was measured using the Tinnitus Reaction Questionnaire. Data were collected before cochlear implantation and 3, 6, 12, and 24 months after implantation. Twenty-eight postlingual unilaterally deaf adults with or without tinnitus were implanted. There was a significant improvement in speech perception in noise across time in all spatial configurations. There was an overall significant improvement on the subjective perception of hearing and quality of life. Tinnitus disturbance reduced significantly across time. Age at implantation and duration of deafness did not influence the outcomes significantly. Cochlear implantation provided significant improvement in speech understanding in challenging situations, subjective perception of hearing performance, and quality of life. Cochlear implantation also resulted in reduced tinnitus disturbance. Age at implantation and duration of deafness did not seem to influence the outcomes.

One of the major complaints of people with a single-sided deafness is the inability to localize sound sources. Evidence suggests that subjects with a hearing loss can benefit from the use of a cochlear implant (CI) in sound localization. This study aimed to determine the effect of CI use on localization ability in unilaterally deafened subjects. Sixteen adult subjects with postlingual unilateral deafness, fitted with a CI on the deaf side, were included in this study. The auditory speech sounds evaluation (A§E) localization test was used to determine localization with a CI on (binaural) and a CI off (monaural). The root mean square error was used as a measure of the subject's localization performance. Stratified analyses were performed to test the influence of gender, age of implantation (55 years), and the duration of deafness (10 years) on localization ability. Subjects with a CI on localized significantly better than without a CI. Gender, age, and the duration of deafness had no effect on the localization ability of the subjects. Cochlear implantation is effective in improving localization abilities in subjects with unilateral deafness. The root mean square error dropped significantly with binaural hearing compared to monaural hearing.

Objective: To assess the benefits of hearing aids on tinnitus according to the tinnitus reaction questionnaire (TRQ; ), to verify whether the degree of masking provided by the hearing aid influenced the TRQ score, to examine whether the matched tinnitus pitch predicted the effectiveness of hearing aids in masking tinnitus, and to determine whether prescription of high-frequency amplification might be desirable in tinnitus management when tinnitus pitch is high. Design and study sample: A retrospective evaluation of the clinical outcomes of 70 tinnitus patients fitted with hearing aids was undertaken. The primary outcome measure was the TRQ, with a secondary subjective measure of tinnitus masking. Results: Participants who achieved masking with their hearing aids had greater reduction in TRQ scores. Masking was more likely to be achieved when participants had good low-frequency hearing and tinnitus pitch fell into the frequency range of the hearing aids. Conclusions: The results support the use of hearing aids for tinnitus management, and suggest that masking may be a significant contributor to hearing aid success, implying that high-frequency amplification may be effective in high-pitch tinnitus.